Statistic

Hypothesis

Hypothesis is a procedure by which we test a statement

true or false.

Abdullah
3/3/2010

Abdullah Izam BBA 4th semester Muslim Educational Complex Phone: 0345-9136452Page 1
Hypothesis
A hypothesis (from Greek plural hypotheses) is a proposed explanation for an observable
phenomenon.The term derives from the Greek hypotithenai meaning "to put under" or "to
suppose." For a hypothesis to be put forward as a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method
requires that one can test it. Scientists generally base scientific hypotheses on previous
observations that cannot be satisfactorily explained with the available scientific theories.
Even though the words "hypothesis" and "theory" are often used synonymously in common
and informal usage, a scientific hypothesis is not the same as a scientific theory – although
the difference is sometimes more one of degree than of principle.

A working hypothesis is a provisionally accepted hypothesis.

In a related but distinguishable usage, the term hypothesis is used for the antecedent of a
proposition; thus in proposition "If P, then Q", P denotes the hypothesis (or antecedent); Q
can be called a consequent. P is the assumption in a (possibly counterfactual) What If
question.

The adjective hypothetical, meaning "having the nature of a hypothesis", or "being assumed
to exist as an immediate consequence of a hypothesis", can refer to any of these meanings of
the term "hypothesis".

Uses

In Plato's Meno (86e-87b), Socrates dissects virtue with a method used by

mathematicians,that of 'investigating from a hypothesis'. In this sense, 'hypothesis' refers to a
clever idea or to a convenient mathematical approach that simplifies cumbersome
calculations. Cardinal Bellarmine gave a famous example of this usage in the warning issued
to Galileo in the early 17th century: that he must not treat the motion of the Earth as a reality,
but merely as a hypothesis.

Abdullah Izam BBA 4th semester Muslim Educational Complex Phone: 0345-9136452 Page 2
In common usage in the 21st century, a hypothesis refers to a provisional idea whose merit
requires evaluation. For proper evaluation, the framer of a hypothesis needs to define
specifics in operational terms. A hypothesis requires more work by the researcher in order to
either confirm or disprove it. In due course, a confirmed hypothesis may become part of a
theory or occasionally may grow to become a theory itself. Normally, scientific hypotheses
have the form of a mathematical model. Sometimes, but not always, one can also formulate
them as existential statements, stating that some particular instance of the phenomenon under
examination has some characteristic and causal explanations, which have the general form of
universal statements, stating that every instance of the phenomenon has a particular
characteristic.

Any useful hypothesis will enable predictions by reasoning (including deductive reasoning).
It might predict the outcome of an experiment in a laboratory setting or the observation of a
phenomenon in nature. The prediction may also invoke statistics and only talk about
probabilities. Karl Popper, following others, has argued that a hypothesis must be falsifiable,
and that one cannot regard a proposition or theory as scientific if it does not admit the
possibility of being shown false. Other philosophers of scie nce have rejected the criterion of
falsifiability or supplemented it with other criteria, such as verifiability (e.g., verificationism)
or coherence (e.g., confirmation holism). The scientific method involves experimentation on
the basis of hypotheses in order to answer questions and explore observations.

In framing a hypothesis, the investigator must not currently know the outcome of a test or
that it remains reasonably under continuing investigation. Only in such cases does the
experiment, test or study potentially increase the probability of showing the truth of a
hypothesis. If the researcher already knows the outcome, it counts as a "consequence" — and
the researcher should have already considered this while formulating the hypothesis. If one
cannot assess the predictions by observation or by experience, the hypothesis classes as not
yet useful, and must wait for others who might come afterward to make possible the needed
observations. For example, a new technology or theory might make the necessary
experiments feasible.

Abdullah Izam BBA 4th semester Muslim Educational Complex Phone: 0345-9136452 Page 3
Scientific hypothesis

People refer to a trial solution to a problem as a hypothesis — often called an "educated

guess"— because it provides a suggested solution based on the evidence. Experimenters may
test and reject several hypotheses before solving the problem.

According to Schick and Vaughn, researchers weighing up alternative hypotheses may take
into consideration:

Testability (compare falsifiability as discussed above)

Simplicity (as in the application of "Occam's razor", discouraging the postulation of
excessive numbers of entities)
Scope – the apparent application of the hypothesis to multiple cases of phenomena
Fruitfulness – the prospect that a hypothesis may explain further phenomena in the
future
Conservatism – the degree of "fit" with existing recognized knowledge-systems

Evaluating hypotheses

According to Karl Popper's hypothetico-deductive method (also known as the method of

"conjectures and refutations") demands falsifiable hypotheses, framed in such a manner that
the scientific community can prove them false (usually by observation). According to this
view, a hypothesis cannot be "confirmed", because there is always the possibility that a
future experiment will show that it is false. Hence, failing to falsify a hypothesis does not
prove that hypothesis: it remains provisional. However, a hypothesis that has been rigorously
tested and not falsified can form a reasonable basis for action, i.e., we can act as if it is true,
until such time as it is falsified. Just because we've never observed rain falling upward,
doesn't mean that we never will—however improbable, our theory of gravity may be falsified
some day.

Popper's view is not the only view on evaluating hypotheses. For example, some forms of
empiricism hold that under a well-crafted, well- controlled experiment, a lack of falsification

Abdullah Izam BBA 4th semester Muslim Educational Complex Phone: 0345-9136452 Page 4
does count as verification, since such an experiment ranges over the full scope of possibilities
in the problem domain. Should we ever discover some place where gravity did not function,
and rain fell upward, this would not falsify our current theory of gravity (which, on this view,
has been verified by innumerable well- formed experiments in the past) – it would rather
suggest an expansion of our theory to encompass some new force or previously undiscovered
interaction of forces. In other words, our initial theory as it stands is verified but incomplete.
This situation illustrates the importance of having well-crafted, well-controlled experiments
that range over the full scope of possibilities for applying the theory.

In recent years philosophers of science have tried to integrate the various approaches to
evaluating hypothesis, and the scientific method in ge neral, to form a more complete system
that integrates the individual concerns of each approach. Notably, Imre Lakatos and Paul
Feyerabend, both former students of Popper, have produced novel attempts at such a
synthesis.

Statistical hypothesis testing

Main article: Statistical hypothesis testing

When a possible correlation or similar relation between phenomena is investigated, such as,
for example, whether a proposed remedy is effective in treating a disease, that is, at least to
some extent and for some patients, the hypothesis that a relation exists cannot be examined
the same way one might examine a proposed new law of nature: in such an investigation a
few cases in which the tested remedy shows no effect do not falsify the hypothesis. Instead,
statistical tests are used to determine how likely it is that the overall effect would be observed
if no real relation as hypothesized exists. If that likelihood is sufficiently small (e.g., less than
1%), the existence of a relation may be assumed. Otherwise, any observed effect may as well
be due to pure chance.

In statistical hypothesis testing two hypotheses are compared, which are called the null
hypothesis and the alternative hypothesis. The null hypothesis is the hypothesis that states
that there is no relation between the phenomena whose relation is under investigation, or at
least not of the form given by the alternative hypothesis. The alternative hypothesis, as the

Abdullah Izam BBA 4th semester Muslim Educational Complex Phone: 0345-9136452 Page 5
name suggests, is the alternative to the null hypothesis: it states that there is some kind of
relation. The alternative hypothesis may take several forms, depending on the nature of the
hypothesized relation; in particular, it can be two-sided (for example: there is some effect, in
a yet unknown direction) or one-sided (the direction of the hypothesized relation, positive or
negative, is fixed in advance).

Proper use of statistical testing requires that these hypotheses, and the threshold (such as 1%)
at which the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis is accepted, all be
determined in advance, before the observations are collected or inspected. If these criteria are
determined later, when the data to be tested is already known, the test is invalid.

Problem

Inferential Statistics - Testing of hypothesis using five step procedure

1. The new director of special programs in XYZ Corporation felt the customers were waiting
too long to receive and complete forms needed to enroll in special pro grams. After collecting
some data, Ms. Jones determined the mean wait time was 28 minutes. She felt this time
period was excessive and she instituted new procedures to streamline the process. One month
later, a sample of 127 customers was selected. The mea n wait time recorded was 26.9
minutes and the standard deviation of the sampling was 8 minutes. Using the 0.02 level of
significance, conduct a five-step hypothesis testing procedure to determine if the new
processes significantly reduced the wait time.

2. A study was conducted on the annual incomes of corporate trainers in the state of New
York in metropolitan areas having a population less than 100,000 and in metropolitan areas
having a population over 500,000. Some sample statistics are:
SAMPLE STATISTIC POPULATION LESS THAN 100K POPULATION MORE THAN
500K Sample Size 45,60 Sample Mean $31,290,$31,330 Sample SD $1,060 ,$1,900
Test the hypothesis that the annual income of corporate trainers in areas of more then
500,000 are significantly more than those in areas of less than 100,000. Use the 5% level of

Abdullah Izam BBA 4th semester Muslim Educational Complex Phone: 0345-9136452 Page 6
risk.

3. In a recent national survey, the mean weekly allowance for a nine-year-old child from his
or her parents was reported to be $3.65. A random sample of 45 nine- year-olds in
northwestern Ohio revealed the mean allowance to be $3.69 with a standard deviation of
0.24. At the 0.05 level of significance, is there a difference in the mean allowances nationally
and the mean allowances in northwestern Ohio for nine- year-olds?

4. Metro Real Estate Association is preparing a pamphlet that they feel might be of interest to
prospective homebuyers in the Middletown and Brockton areas of the city. One item of
interest is the number of years children remain in the same district for schooling. A sample of
40 households with school-aged children in Middletown was randomly selected. The mean
length of time in the district was 7.6 years, with a standard deviation of 2.3 years. A sample
of 55 households in Brockton revealed the mean length of time in the district was 8.1 years,
with a standard deviation of 2.9 years. At the 0.05 level of significance, can we conclude the
Middletown students stayed in their districts less time than the Brockton students? Use the
five-step hypothesis testing procedure.

5. A sample of 40 observations is selected from one somewhat normal population. The

sample mean is 102 and the sample standard deviation is 5. A sample of 50 observations is
selected from a second source. The sample mean was 99 and the standard deviation was 6.
Conduct a test of the hypothesis using the 0.04 level of significance.

Developing an Hypothesis Statement

Whenever an experiment is conducted, the scientist performing the experiment must know
what he is trying to prove. Actually, scientists rarely prove anything. Normally, they
"support" or "reject" their hypothesis.

Abdullah Izam BBA 4th semester Muslim Educational Complex Phone: 0345-9136452 Page 7
In this exercise you will have the chance to develop several hypothesis that might be tested in
a laboratory. Note: you will not necessarily test any of your hypothesis, but each one must be
TESTABLE. (just in case)

Below is a list of "observations" made by someone such as yourself. Based on the

observations, develop a workable hypothesis that could be used to test some aspect of the
observation. Remember, an HYPOTHESIS is an EDUCATED GUESS that is TESTABLE.
You must use complete sentences.

List of Observations:

1. Bees spend hours flying around the paperboy when he wears his bright
yellow "highly visible" vests, but not on days when he does not wear the
vest.

2. Shiny nail rust when left exposed on a construction site, but galvanized nails
do not rust in the same condition.

3. Kim notices that Brad's Brown Bread does not mold after a week in an open

bag. Walter's Wonderful White Bread grows a layer of black fur in the same
length of time in it's open bag.

4. Sam, an avid lizard lover, has a hard time catching up with the wild lizards
during the summer. His luck changes when the cool days of November
arrive,

5. Perry's Porsche won't start.

6. While camping, Terry refuses to bathe, think it unmanly. Jeff takes at least a
sponge bath every other day. After two weeks, Jeff is covered with
mosquito bites. Terry is virtually bite free.

Abdullah Izam BBA 4th semester Muslim Educational Complex Phone: 0345-9136452 Page 8
 7. A boat owner complains about having to scrape barnacles from the hull of
his sailboat that is docked in San Diego Bay. he says he never has to scrape
them from his houseboat in Lake Shasta.

8. After playing basketball, Mr. Christensen sweats terribly, turns red, and
looks as though he's going to pass out. He complains that he never used to
feel this way after a game.

The Development Hypothesis (1852)

Herbert Spencer

This early essay of Spencer's was originally published anonymously in The Leader for March
20 1852. It was the second contribution in a regular series entitled "The Haythorne Papers".
Spencer's identity was revealed some while after. It is reproduced in Herbert Spencer, Essays
Scientific, Political & Speculative, Williams and Norgate (3 vols 1891) pp.1-7]; and here in
full. David Clifford, Ph.D., Cambridge University, prepared the html text in 1997; George P.
Landow reformatted it in 2008.

Joachim Dagg, Abteilung für Entomologie, Institut für Phytopathologie und Pflanzenschutz,
Göttingen, has written to point out that 'the version Spencer later published differs from the
original in The Leader of 20 March 1852 in one crucial phrase: "Those who cavalierly reject
the Theory of Evolution..." originally read "Those who cavalierly reject the Theory of
Lamarck..."

In a debate upon the development hypothesis, lately narrated to me by a friend, one of the
disputants was described as arguing that as, in all our experience, we know no such
phenomenon as transmutation of species, it is unphilosophical to assume that transmutation
of species ever takes place. Had I been present I think that passing over his assertion, which
is open to criticism, I should have replied that as in all our experience we have never known

Abdullah Izam BBA 4th semester Muslim Educational Complex Phone: 0345-9136452 Page 9
a species created, it was, by his own showing, unphilosophical to assume that any species
ever had been created.

Those who cavalierly reject the Theory of Evolution as not being adequately supported by
facts, seem to forget that their own theory is supported by no facts at all. Like the majority of
men who are born to a given belief, they demand the most rigorous proof of any adverse
belief, but assume that their own needs none. Here we find, scattered over the globe,
vegetable and animal organisms numbering, of the one kind (according to Humboldt), some
320,000 species, and of the other, some 2,000,000 species (see Carpenter) and if to these we
add the numbers of animal and vegetable species which have become extinct, we may safely
estimate the number of species that have existed, and are existing, on the Earth, at not less
than ten millions. Well, which is the most rational theory about these ten millions of species?
Is it most likely that there have been ten millions of special creations? or is it most likely that,
by continual modifications due to change of circumstances, ten millions of varieties have
been produced, as varieties are being produced still?

Doubtless many will reply that they can more easily conceive ten millions of special
creations to have taken place, than they can conceive that ten millions of varieties have arisen
by successive modifications. All such, however, will find, on inquiry, that they are under an
illusion. This is one of the many cases in which men do not really believe, but rather believe
they believe. It is not that they can truly conceive ten millions of special creations to have
taken place, but that they think they can do so. Careful introspection will show t hem that they
have never yet realized to themselves the creation of even one species If they have formed a
definite conception of the process, let them tell us how a new species is constructed, and how
it makes its appearance. Is it thrown down from the clouds? or must we hold to the notion
that it struggles up out of the ground? Do its limbs and viscera rush together from all the
points of the compass? or must we receive the old Hebrew idea, that God takes clay and
moulds a new creature? If they say that a new creature is produced in none of these modes,
which are too absurd to be believed, then they are required to describe the mode in which a
new creature may be produced - a mode which does not seem absurd; and such a mode they
will find that they neither have conceived nor can conceive.

Abdullah Izam BBA 4th semester Muslim Educational Complex Phone: 0345-9136452 Page 10
Should the believers in special creations consider it unfair thus to call upon them to describe
how special creations take place, I reply that this is far less than they demand from the
supporters of the Development Hypothesis. They are merely asked to point out a conceivable
mode. On the other hand, they ask, not simply for a conceivable mode, but for the actual
mode. They do not say - Show us how this may take place; but they say - Show us how this
does take place. So far from its being unreasonable to put the above question, it would be
reasonable to ask not only for a possible mode of special creation, but for an ascertained
mode; seeing that this is no greater a demand than they make upon their opponents.

And here we may perceive how much more defensible the new doctrine is than the old one.
Even could the supporters of the Development Hypothesis merely show that the origination
of species by the process of modification is conceivable, they would be in a better positio n
than their opponents. But they can do much more than this. They can show that the process
of modification has effected, and is effecting, decided changes in all organisms subject to
modifying influences. Though, from the impossibility of getting at a sufficiency of facts, they
are unable to trace the many phases through which any existing species has passed in arriving
at its present form, or to identify the influences which caused the successive modifications;
yet, they can show that any existing species - animal or vegetable - when placed under
conditions different from its previous ones, immediately begins to undergo certain changes
fitting it for the new conditions. They can show that in successive generations these changes
continue; until, ultimately, the new conditions become the natural ones. They can show that
in cultivated plants, in domesticated animals, and in the several races of men, such alterations
have taken place. They can show that the degrees of difference so produced are often, as in
dogs, greater than those on which distinctions of species are in other cases founded. They can
show that it is a matter of dispute whether some of these modified forms are varieties or
separate species. They can show, too, that the changes daily taking place in ourselves - the
facility that attends long practice, and the loss of aptitude that begins when practice ceases -
the strengthening of passions habitually gratified, and the weakening of those habitually
curbed - the development of every faculty, bodily, moral, or intellectual, according to the use
made of it - are all explicable on this same principle. And thus they can show that throughout
all organic nature there is at work a modifying influence of the kind they assign as the cause

Abdullah Izam BBA 4th semester Muslim Educational Complex Phone: 0345-9136452 Page 11
of these specific differences an influence which, though slow in its action, does, in time, if
the circumstances demand it, produce marked changes - an influence which, to all
appearance, would produce in the millions of years, and under the great varieties of condition
which geological records imply, any amount of change.

Which, then, is the most rational hypothesis? - that of special creations which has neither a
fact to support it nor is even definitely conceivable; or that of modification, which is not only
definitely conceivable, but is countenanced by the habitudes of every existing organism?

That by any series of changes a protozoon should ever become a mammal, seems to those
who are not familiar with zoology, and who have not seen how clear becomes the
relationship between the simplest and the most complex forms when intermediate forms are
examined, a very grotesque notion. Habitually looking at things rather in their statical aspect
than in their dynamical aspect they never realize the fact that, by small increments o f
modification, any amount of modification may in time be generated. That surprise which
they feel on finding one whom they last saw as a boy, grown into a man, becomes incredulity
when the degree of change is greater. Nevertheless, abundant instances are at hand of the
mode in which we may pass to the most diverse forms by insensible gradations. Arguing the
matter some time since with a learned professor, I illustrated my position thus :-You admit
that there is no apparent relationship between a circle and an hyperbola. The one is a finite
curve; the other is an infinite one. All parts of the one are alike; of the other no parts are alike
[save parts on its opposite sides]. The one incloses a space; the other will not inclose a space
though produced for ever. Yet opposite as are these curves in all their properties, they may be
connected together by a series of intermediate curves, no one of which differs from the
adjacent ones in any appreciable degree. Thus, if a cone be cut by a plane at right angles to
its axis we get a circle. If, instead of being perfectly at right angles, the plane subtends with
the axis an angle of 89° 59', we have an ellipse which no human eye, even when aided by an
accurate pair of compasses, can distinguish from a circle. Decreasing the angle minute by
minute, the ellipse becomes first perceptibly eccentric, then manifestly so, and by and by
acquires so immensely elongated a form, as to bear no recognizable resemblance to a circle.
By continuing this process, the ellipse passes insensibly into a parabola; and, ultimately, by
still further diminishing the angle, into an hyperbola. Now here we have four different

Abdullah Izam BBA 4th semester Muslim Educational Complex Phone: 0345-9136452 Page 12
species of curve-circle, ellipse, parabola, and hyperbola - each having its peculiar properties
and its separate equation, and the first and last of which are quite opposite in nature,
connected together as members of one series, all producible by a single process of insensible
modification.

But the blindness of those who think it absurd to suppose that complex organic forms may
have arisen by successive modifications out of simple ones, becomes astonishing when we
remember that complex organic forms arc daily being thus produced. A tree differs from a
seed immeasurably in every respect - in bulk, in structure, in colour, in form, in chemical
composition: differs so greatly that no visible resemblance of any kind can be pointed out
between them. Yet is the one changed in the course of a few years into the other changed so
gradually, that at no moment can it be said - Now the seed ceases to he, and the tree exists.
What can be more widely contrasted than a newly-born child and the small, semi- transparent
spherule constituting the human ovum? The infant is so complex in structure that a
cyclopædia is needed to describe its constituent parts. The germinal vesicle is so simple that
it may be defined in a line. Nevertheless a few months suffice to develop the one out of the
other; and that, too, by a series of modifications so small, that were the embryo examined at
successive minutes, even a microscope would with difficulty disclose any sensible changes.
That the uneducated and the ill-educated should think the hypothesis that all races of beings,
man inclusive, may in process of time have been evolved from the simplest monad, a
ludicrous one, is not to be wondered at. But for the physiologist, who knows that every
individual being is so evolved - who knows, further, that in their earliest condition the germs
of all plants and animals whatever are so similar, "that there is no appreciab le distinction
amongst them, which would enable it to be determined whether a particular molecule is the
germ of a Conferva or of an Oak, of a Zoophyte or of a Man;" [Carpenter, Principles of
Comparative Physiology, p.474.] - for him to make a difficulty of the matter is inexcusable.
Surely if a single cell may, when subjected to certain influences, become a man in the space
of twenty years; there is nothing absurd in the hypothesis that under certain other influences,
a cell may, in the course of millions of years, give origin to the human race.

We have, indeed, in the part taken by many scientific men in this controversy of "Law versus
Miracle," a good illustration of the tenacious vitality of superstitions. Ask one of our leading

Abdullah Izam BBA 4th semester Muslim Educational Complex Phone: 0345-9136452 Page 13
geologists or physiologists whether he believes in the Mosaic account of the creation, and he
will take the question as next to an insult. Either he rejects the narrative entirely, or
understands it in Some vague non- natural sense. Yet no part of it he unconsciously adopts;
and that, too, literally. For whence has he got this notion of "special creations," which he
thinks so reasonable, and fights for so vigorously? Evidently he can trace it back to no other
source than this myth which be repudiates. He has not a single fact in nature to cite in proof
of it; nor is ho prepared with any chain of reasoning by which it may be established.
Catechize him, and he will be forced to confess that the notion was put into his mind in
childhood as part or a story which he now thinks absurd. And why, after rejecting all the rest
of the story, he should strenuously defend this last remnant of it, as though he had received it
on valid authority, he would be puzzled to say.

Abdullah Izam BBA 4th semester Muslim Educational Complex Phone: 0345-9136452 Page 14